Three prominent investors discuss the ongoing impact of the credit crisis on private equity, sovereign wealth funds, and other financial institutions.
Produced on December 04, 2008.
Full title: Private Equity, Sovereign Funds, & the Global Credit Crunch.
Panel presentations and a discussion on law libraries and the study of law.
Recorded on November 06, 2008.
Panel titled: 21st Century Law Library.
Appearing: Dick Danner, Senior Associate Dean for Information Services and Archibald C. and Frances Fulk Rufty Research Professor of Law at Duke Law School; S. Blair Kauffman, Librarian and Professor of Law, Yale Law Library; and John G. Palfrey, Henry N. Ess III Professor of Law and Vice Dean of Library and Information Resources, Harvard Law Library, panelists.
Panelists discuss the emerging Global Financial Crisis during the 2008 dedication of the law school building.
Recorded on November 06, 2008.
Full title: Building Dedication Celebration: The Credit Crisis: A View From the Street.
Appearing: Moderator: James D. Cox ; Panelists: Nora Jordan '83, head of Davis Polk & Wardwell's Investment Management Group ; George R. Krouse Jr. '70, of counsel, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett ; Ed Greene, general counsel, Citi Markets & Banking.
The subprime mortgage crisis has led to the failure or sale of some venerable financial institutions, as well as the wholesale government bailout of others deemed "too big to fail." Some observers fear the entire financial system may be teetering on the brink of collapse. Professors James Cox, Steven Schwarcz, and Bill Brown discuss the causes and cures for the growing economic crisis. [Bill Brown is a visiting faculty member at Duke Law, and is cofounder of Palmer Labs, LLC, and 8 Rivers Capital, LLC, .
The Brown Discussion features Historian John Hope Franklin, Judge Louis Pollak, Professor Jack Greenberg, Professor Guy-Uriel Charles, and is moderated by Professors Neil Siegel and Charles Clotfelter. They discuss what it took to enact the decision, how it has impacted education in the United States, and what the future holds for the landmark decision.
Recorded on March 27, 2008.
Panel titled: Brown vs. Board of Education: Past, Present & Future.
Appearing: Speakers: John Hope Franklin, Louis Pollak, Jack Greenberg, and Guy-Uriel Charles.
Sponsored by the Duke University Center for European Studies and Duke Law Center for International and Comparative Law, this day-long conference brings together leading legal scholars, privacy professionals, and government officials from Europe and the United States to discuss the future of data privacy in light of the new realities of our times. Welcome and opening remarks by Francesca Bignami and Gilbert W. Merkx.
Recorded on January 28, 2008.
Panel titled: The Past & Present of Data Privacy ; Welcome & Opening Remarks.
Since 1976, when genetic material from one species was first introduced into another, animal bioengineering has been a controversial topic. Lawyers and scientists from across the country came together to explore and discuss the evolution and development of laws relating to the use of animals in bioengineering.
Since 1976, when genetic material from one species was first introduced into another, animal bioengineering has been a controversial topic. Lawyers and scientists from across the country came together to explore and discuss the evolution and development of laws relating to the use of animals in bioengineering.
Since 1976, when genetic material from one species was first introduced into another, animal bioengineering has been a controversial topic. Lawyers and scientists from across the country came together to explore and discuss the evolution and development of laws relating to the use of animals in bioengineering.
Since 1976, when genetic material from one species was first introduced into another, animal bioengineering has been a controversial topic. Lawyers and scientists from across the country came together to explore and discuss the evolution and development of laws relating to the use of animals in bioengineering.
Stare decisis, in Latin literally "Let the decision stand," is the doctrine by which courts adhere to previously decided cases or precedents. Professors Paulsen and Gerhardt will debate this provocative topic, with Professor Paulsen specifically arguing that "the doctrine of stare decisis is ... unconstitutional and dis-serves all of the rule-of-law values it is alleged to advance."
Recorded on October 25, 2007.
Appearing: Curtis Bradley, moderator ; Michael Paulsen (University of St. Thomas School of Law), panelist ; Michael Gerhardt (UNC-CH School of Law), panelist.
Recorded on October 24, 2007.
Appearing: Speakers: Mark Kleinschmidt of Fair Trial Initiative and Professor Jim Coleman.
Discussion of important cases that the Supreme Court will hear in the upcoming term, including the Guantanamo cases and Medellin, as well as some significant employment discrimination, election, and criminal procedure cases.
Recorded on October 01, 2007.
Appearing: Neil Siegel (Duke Law), introductions/panelist ; Curtis Bradley (Duke Law), panelist ; Catherine Fisk (Duke Law), panelist ; James Coleman (Duke Law), panelist.
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
Duke President Richard Brodhead's comments relating to the Duke Lacrosse case during The Court of Public Opinion conference.
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?
What catapults a case into the media spotlight? Who is responsible for focusing media and public attention on a particular case? Once a case gains high-profile status, what are the professional and ethical roles and responsibilities of members of the media, the bar, and the institutions involved? How do media balance their First Amendment right to watch over the operation of government with the rights of the accused?